dragonagefandomcom-20200223-history
Talk:Thaig
Thaigs vs Cities Is there a reason why Orzammar and Kal-Sharok are listed as thaigs on the thaigs page? Somebody please correct me if I'm mistaken, but I thought thaigs were satellite settlements associated with a larger city. -Vim- (talk) 19:50, September 13, 2010 (UTC) :I have a feeling you might be right about this. I've never heard of Orzammar or Kal-Sharok referred to as a Thaig. I think Thaigs are like Baronies, belonging to a clan or somesuch. -- 19:53, September 13, 2010 (UTC) ::I don't think Kal'Hirol is a Thaig either. I have a feeling that Kal might mean Fortress, and Kal'Hirol is the Fortress for the Paragon Hirol -- 19:59, September 13, 2010 (UTC) :::Given that Kal-Sharok is also both a "center of learning for the smith caste" and a "home", it seems to be more than just fortress. It seems to fit the definition of a thaig also, even if for some odd reason (perhaps marketing reasons?) it isn't called one. And from what I recall, thaigs can be fortresses too. The two are not mutually exclusive. -Vim- (talk) 21:16, September 13, 2010 (UTC) :According to the shaper a thaig is to the dwarves what a colony is to the humans. So yes, I agree with you that Orzammar and Kal-Sharok are no thaigs. However, I cannot comment on Kal'Hirol.--Pp2009 (talk) 20:01, September 13, 2010 (UTC) I checked the Codex Entry of Kal'Hirol: So I think it is at least not wrong to call it a thaig. --Pp2009 (talk) 11:16, September 14, 2010 (UTC) I'm sort of reviving this since it came up in a recent discussion on the chat. They do make a difference between the thaigs and cities: :"The cost of victory, however, was great. The Deep Roads were sealed to hold back the darkspawn, cutting off thaigs and whole cities forever." (from the official guide) However, they also referred to thaigs as cities (or city-fortresses). The official description of Orzammar on the official website state, "the underground city-fortresses called thaigs". --'D.' (talk ·''' ) 22:10, April 10, 2012 (UTC) Orzammar is simultaneously described as a thaig and a city here: Codex entry: The Key to the City. I assume that cities are the larger thaigs then. Asherinka (talk) 23:10, April 10, 2012 (UTC) :I think it's safe to assume that. Cities are thaigs, but thaigs aren't necessarily cities. --'''D. (talk ·''' ) 04:38, April 11, 2012 (UTC) DA:I throws "kingdoms" into the mix. So the question becomes: What is a city, what is a thaig, what is a kingdom, and what is some combination thereof? TheUnknown285 (talk) 18:41, December 12, 2014 (UTC) :* '''City is a large settlement. :* Thaig means settlement. :* And a kingdom contains several settlements. The capital of the kingdom simply shares the same name with the kingdom, like it happened in several city-states in world history. :Oh and, since DA:O the word "kingdom" was into the mix. 00:08, December 15, 2014 (UTC) Merging I've noticed that several of the minor Thaigs have merge tags on them that would make them part of this page. I just want to say that I am opposed to this as it would most likely create a page that goes into details about some thaigs (ie Zygmunt) and not others (ie Ortan), or an exceedingly long page covering a vast array of information that could be cumbersome to navigate. I thought this a better place to put my objections than on each of the individual smaller thaig pages as all merges would affect this page, hope that's ok. --''--Isolationistmagi'' 07:05, March 18, 2012 (UTC) :I agree with Isolationistmagi Ash erinka (talk) 09:11, March 18, 2012 (UTC) :Most thaigs are not notable: they are mentioned in only one codex. I'm proposing to merge rather than delete to make a list akin to the character list on Dragon Age II, and link when appropriate. --'D.' (talk ·''' ) 16:13, March 18, 2012 (UTC) So it'd be like a one to two sentence description and then a link if needed? I can support that. --''--Isolationistmagi'' 19:20, March 18, 2012 (UTC) :Yes. The link would most likely be to the codex entry or the main page article. --'''D. (talk · ) 19:56, March 18, 2012 (UTC) :I can support that too. Asherinka (talk) 21:10, April 10, 2012 (UTC) Kal'Hirol status Kal'Hirol is in a category of the lost thaigs, but in DAA epilogue it said that Orzammar reclaimed it, it's also noted in the description. However shouldn't it be in a category of the reclaimed thiags? Reclaimed means no longer lost. We can't be sure about reclaiming Orthan thaig or Bownammar or Anvil of the Void, but about Kal'Hirol we can be certain. So I suggest to make a category of the reclaimed thaigs. (talk) 06:52, June 4, 2013 (UTC) :I have added Ortan and Kal'Hirol to the inhabited thaigs. :) Henio0 (talk) 21:50, June 4, 2013 (UTC) ::Ortan Thaig is not reclaimed, it's just that you recover some lineage documents from that thaig. Subsequently, I removed that part. 21:53, June 4, 2013 (UTC) Daerwin's Mouth Since Daerwin's Mouth is/was part of the Stone and was once an important part of the dwarven empire before the Blights, should it be listed as a thaig, since it does not follow the common naming conventions and is not explicitly mentioned as a thaig?Sharth (talk) 17:37, January 5, 2015 (UTC)